G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions)

[Black_Elk]

Lol! Yeah you’re right.
:-D

San Francisco has a nicer ring to it. It’s a better code name. I might as well own it!

“SF Rules”
G40 San Francisco, 1942 San Francisco

Suggests the naval element and highlights the VC. That’s the one we’ll use when it give its own thread. Only took like 47 pages in this thread for me to find something that scratches my itch haha

[CWO Marc]

@Black_Elk:

“SF Rules”
G40 San Francisco, 1942 San Francisco

The formulations that use “San Francisco” in full are a better choice than the abbreviation “SF” because “SF Rules” suggests that they’re some sort of set of science-fiction house rule for A&A…like perhaps, let’s say, a tech upgrade for Nazi flying saucers in Antarctica or some such thing.

[Black_Elk]

Good point. Nazi space zombies from the moon, not exactly what we’re going for.
:-D

Just anticipating the need for a shorthand at some point, since people love acryonms around here, but I’ve been calling it 1940 San Francisco Rules or 1942 San Francisco in my head.

Not to get too far ahead of myself, but the ruleset change is simple enough that it might work for some of the previous boards as well. Or other variants of G40, such as the Halifax commonwealth or single UK economy concepts. Perhaps it might work with some of the alternate timeline mods that have later start dates too. I see it as a relatively simple way to reset the game. Whether it balances by sides on a given map, remains to be seen, but it should produce a pretty signicant tweak to the basic play patterns.

[baron Münchhausen]

@barney:

What’s the plan for interceptors ? They D2 while escorts hit at 1 ? I know that’s how it used to be except for bmbrs hit at 1 as well. Which, obviously, is a big difference.

@Baron
yea no bonus 2 on sbr. I’ll get started on it. Also a Naval M3 version. I might be able to make that an option inside the game so you’d only need one version. That would take longer if possible. We’ll see how this goes for now

D6 damage… Nice.  :-)
The best and simplest balance you can get is with Fighter A1 D1 in SBR, same as OOB.
Let us know if you can make StB A0 in SBR, and if this going to be hard.

Even if Strategic bomber A0 D0 M6 C5 remains 1 hit, I believe it can be easily enforce by players, to select them as last casualties, to not affect direct regular combat.

More, it allows option to try it with 1 hit value, if someone is curious of how devious such mobile hit point only unit can be.

And in SBR, 1 hit, is correct as either Fg or StB can be casualty and attacker can choose to lose one or the other.
In fact, I like that attacker select 5 IPCs bomber as casualty instead of escorting 10 IPCs Fg. It is far more depicting dogfight.

EDIT: You push me to crunch on this number for escort A1 and interceptor D2… 
IDK if it will provide a balance SBR compared to OOB G40.

[barney]

Agree about casualty selection Baron. So Interceptors hit at 2 and escorts 1, no bmbr hits for pre raid ? That’s how it’s setup right now
@Baron
Attack 0 in SBR ? Not following.

Didn’t mean to push :)

Is easy to change

Ahh…I misunderstood. Interceptors should be 1 as well. Let me know and I’ll change it.

[barney]

@Black_Elk:

I’ll admit a strong desire right now to code name this HR proposal “SAN FRANCISCO RULES” or SF rules for short? Because it puts the SF VC into contention, and that’s also the city where I grew up.
Any objections?
:-D

Maybe “WEST COAST RULES” is more inclusive, since most places have a West Coast somewhere, even in Japan or Germany hehe. But yeah, that’s what I’m leaning towards right now.

SF always reminds me of Special Forces, which is ok. Better than Los Gatos I guess, which is where I was born : )
Anyway I like West Coast Rules myself. It’s the "all inclusive " thing that does it for me : )

[baron Münchhausen]

@Black_Elk:

Killer!  :-D

I will say, I think the move 3 naval option has some serious potential. Whatever threat is posed by the German transport and u-boats in terms of setting up an early Sea Lion squeeze, this is basically offset by the fact that the AB +2 would allow the Americans to transit fighters from E. US to England directly. And 3 movement standard for ships (+1 from the NB) also means that the US Atlantic situation is way more interesting.

The global map is kind of bizarre in that England and Normandy are both 4 moves away from sz 101. In my view this kind of discourages D-Day staging in the UK, and I’m not sure there’s a whole lot that can be done about that. But with a standard move of 3 for all ships (and a +1 from the NB) the US has lot more options for a crossing. There is also an interesting move out of sz 106 to 125 (from the Nova Scotia NB) which puts Norway on the table for the northern route. A similar move out of 101 to sz 92, puts Algeria in play, and offers a somewhat more realistic Torch option, by giving the Eastern Task Force a place to land (instead of just the Western Task Force in Morocco)

On the Pacific side the move 3 option presents a dilemma, because it means that Tokyo and San Francisco are in reach of one another (via sz 8.) Frankly I don’t mind this so much, because it means that the SF VC would actually be in contention for once, and this route makes control of the Aleutians/sz 8 pretty critical.
Of course for a J1DoW, the balance of forces tilts heavily in Japan’s favor, which is definitely an issue. One possible solution would be to just give the US a blocking destroyer in sz 8. This is the main “required” set up change I was referring to earlier, since I don’t really see a way around it. But I suppose all this could be worked out, if people like the change otherwise.

Some interesting consequences regarding the NBs and sea zone shucks…
sz 6 to 10 (Japan/ W. US)
sz 81 to 39 (Egypt/India)
sz 39 to 20 (India/Kwangtung)
sz 6 to 37 (Japan/Malaya)
sz 37 to 62 (Malaya/E. Australia)
sz 35 to 26 (Philippines/E. Australia)
sz 35 to 39 (Philippines/India)
sz 62 to 26 (E. Australia/ Hawaii)
sz 26 to 63 (Hawaii/New Zealand)

That’s mainly on the Pacific side, but there are some interesting options on the Atlantic side as well…
sz 101 to 109 (E. US/England)
sz 101 to 105 or 110 (E. US to Normandy or Holland)
sz 110 to 127 (England/Novgorod)
sz 113 to 109, or sz 112 to 92 (W. Germany/Gibraltar)
sz 110 or 105 to sz 93 (Normandy/S. France)
sz 91 to sz 98, or sz 92 to sz 81 (Gibraltar/Egypt)
etc.

Clearly out of initial intent of designer of A&A G40 and 1942.2.

It is weird that you can make a one way trip from US East Coast Sz101 to Normandy or Holland SZ110.
It seems not necessary to land on England.

Here is a simple twist, but it need to be enforce by players in Triple A.
Any Naval combat or amphibious landing cost 1 Movement Point for all sea units.
Said otherwise, 4 Move is only allowed NCM, starting from NB.
3 Move can be done Combat Move from NB, or NCM from anywhere.
2 Move is maximum range for Combat Move when there is no NB.

So, from a Naval Base, you can NCM 4 SZs or 3 SZs if doing a combat move.
Otherwise, all naval units can do NCM up to 3 SZs or can do CM up to 2 SZs.
And Naval Base gives an additional +1M for both CM and NCM.

What do you think?
For me, it solve most of SF WUSA to Japan / Japan to SF WUSA combat move or EastUSA to France.
It will make sense to NCM into England, but not make a direct amphibious assault on Main Europe.

[baron Münchhausen]

@barney:

Agree about casualty selection Baron. So Interceptors hit at 2 and escorts 1, no bmbr hits for pre raid ? That’s how it’s setup right now
@Baron
Attack 0 in SBR ? Not following.

Didn’t mean to push :)

Is easy to change

Ahh…I misunderstood. Interceptors should be 1 as well. Let me know and I’ll change it.

Yes. I’m still working on your first numbers.
Let us the original file as it is. If someone want to test.
Just bring a new additional one with Fg A1 D1.

[LHoffman]

@CWO:

@Black_Elk:

“SF Rules”
G40 San Francisco, 1942 San Francisco

The formulations that use “San Francisco” in full are a better choice than the abbreviation “SF” because “SF Rules” suggests that they’re some sort of set of science-fiction house rule for A&A…like perhaps, let’s say, a tech upgrade for Nazi flying saucers in Antarctica or some such thing.

With all due respect, I don’t think that most people will think SF = Science Fiction. Unless that is usual shorthand in the game modding community that I am unaware of. G40 SF is probably how I will refer to it, or San Fran, something like that.

[barney]

SBRules ! Yea not seeing science fiction either LHoffman

[baron Münchhausen]

@Baron:

@barney:

Agree about casualty selection Baron. So Interceptors hit at 2 and escorts 1, no bmbr hits for pre raid ? That’s how it’s setup right now
@Baron
Attack 0 in SBR ? Not following.

Didn’t mean to push :)

Is easy to change

Ahh…I misunderstood. Interceptors should be 1 as well. Let me know and I’ll change it.

Yes. I’m still working on your first numbers.
Let us the original file as it is. If someone want to test.
Just bring a new additional one with Fg A1 D1.

StB A0 C5 D6 damage vs Fg A1 D2 get no positive results.
You need to rise to D6+2 damage to get acceptable odds against D2 Fighter:

Break even point StB A0 C5, 1D6+2 damage vs Fg A1 D2:  21 StB vs 30, Fgs: 0.700   StB/Fg
1StB D6+2 vs 1Fg D2: + 3.056 - 2.222= + 0.834 IPC damage/SBR12= +10.008
1StB D6+2 vs 2Fgs D2: +2.037 - 3.148 = -1.111 IPC damage/SBR9= -9.999 (Diff.: +0.009)
21 StB vs 30 Fgs:   0.700 StB/Fg
No FIT (Fighter Interception Threshold), always beneficial to Intercept.
This is much less efficient than OOB G40 0.526 StB/Fg
But still better than Balanced Mode 1.156 StB/Fg

I crunch some numbers on StB A1 D0 C8 1D6+2 damage vs Fg D2 C10.
It appears that Break even point is around 2 StBs for 3 Fgs giving 0.667 StB/Fg.
This is slightly less efficient than OOB G40 0.526 StB/Fg but compared to Balanced Mode (1.156 StB/Fg) it is far much better to get more SBRs.
(Break even point: 89 StBs A1 C12 D6+2 vs 77 Fgs D2 C10 : 1.156 StB/Fg)
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=37653.msg1521517#msg1521517

[barney]

Right on Baron. Here they are with interceptors hitting at 1.

https://www.sendspace.com/file/kgazux

with M3 naval

https://www.sendspace.com/file/kfddmz

Open the zip and put the folder inside the downloaded maps folder which is inside your triplea folder.

[baron Münchhausen]

Thank you very much Barney.
Baron

[Black_Elk]

Awesome! Thanks Barney!

Just to the point about move 3 making crossings a bit easier. I think designer intent needs to be measured against the gameplay here. Forcing an extra turn into each ocean crossing makes it possible for the coastal defender to simply adopt a ‘wait and see’ approach, taking no action until the last possible moment. Meanwhile the attacker is forced to telegraph their intentions over a full round of gameplay.

I’m just not sure it is really so desireable to force a one turn gap for each ocean crossing. It has the effect of making it much more difficult for the attacker to get anything going, with a drag on dynamism and the overall pace of play.  For my part, I think a 1 turn crossing on either side of the board has potential to make the game more exciting. It doesn’t completely remove the incentive to stage, because you will generally want to have reinforcements at the ready nearby, when the main invasion occurs. I think you are somewhat less likely to see a dead drop on France straight from E. US as the first maneuver, but rather a staging in UK first, and then the dead drop (so you can support the play with an immediate shuck.) Same deal on the Pacific side. I think you are likely to see a set up landing first (to activate the shuck on reinforcements) and then the main invasion. But if the player chooses not to announce their intentions in this way, then a more direct assault is also something that always has to be considered.

The multi-turn crossings are what currently allows Germany to leave France totally undefended (no Atlantic wall) until the last second. Similarly USA can leave W. US totally undefended until the last second when they notice Japan trying to set up in Alaska or wherever. Japan can do the same, leaving  the home island undefended until they see America coming etc. Move 3 replaces that situation with one that requires a little a more advanced planning on the defenders part, and somewhat less advanced planning on the attackers part. I think this would make for a game that is more action oriented all around, with a much faster pace, and a greater likelihood that the VC win becomes more climactic.

[barney]

heh heh tried a few G1 openers. Think the Bmbrs could prove quite entertaining. Still not sure on the M3 naval, but bringing the CA keeps 110 and 111 about the same.

Haven’t tried a SL or slamming a bunch of subs at the UK CA in 91 yet. Anyway keeps ya from being lazy and makes you think anew : )

[barney]

Sorry to spam out here but if you haven’t tried it, these bombers are a lot of fun. This is the closest I’ve seen a A&A game come to as far as representing SBR. Having them cheaper means you use them more. It’s no big deal if one gets shot down (except to the poor bastards in it), interceptors are protected, unless there are escorts, and the UK has been taking a heck of a lot more damage than usual :)

I could see the US actually being able to bomb Germany to effect. I wonder if we should give minors, AB and NB max damage 8 ? Make bombers a little more powerful. I left Tacs with SBR ability. Was that desired ? Seems ok to me if it was.

Anyway, give it a spin. Haven’t messed with naval M3 too much yet. Don’t want my brain to go into Fukushima mode : )

[baron Münchhausen]

@barney:

Sorry to spam out here but if you haven’t tried it, these bombers are a lot of fun. This is the closest I’ve seen a A&A game come to as far as representing SBR. Having them cheaper means you use them more. It’s no big deal if one gets shot down (except to the poor bastards in it), interceptors are protected, unless there are escorts, and the UK has been taking a heck of a lot more damage than usual :)

I could see the US actually being able to bomb Germany to effect. I wonder if we should give minors, AB and NB max damage 8 ? Make bombers a little more powerful. I left Tacs with SBR ability. Was that desired ? Seems ok to me if it was.

Anyway, give it a spin. Haven’t messed with naval M3 too much yet. Don’t want my brain to go into Fukushima mode : )

Interesting feedback
I believe TcBs C12 with SBR A1 D0 should allow bombing on IC too now.
Since it is so a high cost compared to 5 IPCs, why make such a difference to limit against AB or NB?
After all, StB C5 Dmg 6 now are 2.4 stronger than TcB C12 Dmg 6.
Or, on  60 IPCs basis, 12 SBs gives 12 D6 compared to 5 TcBs giving 5 D6 damage.

On damage, any Maxed out facilities is an incentive to repair.
Better to maxing out more easily I believe.

[Black_Elk]

Glorious!

It was my hope that the bomber change would be fun! Excited to check this out when I get off work.
:-D

M3 is more of a moon shot in my view. I honestly don’t know how it will pan out, or if it will provide the entertainment value I’m hoping for. But at least we got a bomber alternative on offer now!
Thanks again dude

ps. I know for M3 to work in G40, we’d need a US destroyer in sz 8 for balance. That’s my simplest solution for the moment, to at least make the M3 rule playable.

[barney]

@Baron
so give Tac a hit at 1 when battling interceptors and let it bomb factories too ? Sounds good to me.
I was thinking max 8 damage on minors and bases but still have them operational at 2 damage. Might be too much. With these cheaper bombers bases should take more of a pounding anyway. It’s always seemed a little to easy to get them (bases) back in operation to me.

@Black_Elk
Glorious is right ! You’ll have a blast ! I haven’t played a whole turn let alone a game yet but might need to trade a German bomber in for a sub and give Japan an extra inf or two for the Yunnan attack. As you know a few minor tweaks might be necessary to the start but after that let it Roll !

I’m really surprised by how well this seems to work. Is still early but seems way cool to me :-D

[General 6 Stars]

Great. Looking forward to more reports on this.